MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3045042377 · doi:10.3390/rs12142340

DeepInSAR—A Deep Learning Framework for SAR Interferometric Phase Restoration and Coherence Estimation

2020· article· en· W3045042377 on OpenAlexafffund
Xinyao Sun, Aaron Zimmer, Subhayan Mukherjee, Navaneeth Kamballur Kottayil, Parwant Ghuman, Irene Cheng

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutions3v Geomatics (Canada)University of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsComputer scienceInterferometric synthetic aperture radarCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Remote sensingGround truthUsabilityConvolutional neural networkSynthetic aperture radarInterferometryArtificial intelligenceReal-time computingHuman–computer interactionGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past decade, using Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) remote sensing technology for ground displacement detection has become very successful. However, during the acquisition stage, microwave signals reflected from the ground and received by the satellite are contaminated, for example, due to undesirable material reflectance and atmospheric factors, and there is no clean ground truth to discriminate these noises, which adversely affect InSAR phase computation. Accurate InSAR phase filtering and coherence estimation are crucial for subsequent processing steps. Current methods require expert supervision and expensive runtime to evaluate the quality of intermediate outputs, limiting the usability and scalability in practical applications, such as wide area ground displacement monitoring and predication. We propose a deep convolutional neural network based model DeepInSAR to intelligently solve both phase filtering and coherence estimation problems. We demonstrate our model’s performance using simulated and real data. A teacher-student framework is introduced to handle the issue of missing clean InSAR ground truth. Quantitative and qualitative evaluations show that our teacher-student approach requires less input but can achieve better results than its stack-based teacher method even on new unseen data. The proposed DeepInSAR also outperforms three other top non-stack based methods in time efficiency without human supervision.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.523

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations55
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207